Lacy Green (and countless others feminists) claimed that no one, but especially women, lie about being raped. This was all part of the "just believe" campaign.

Lacy Green raped over 4 million people, including me. JUST BELIEVE!!! But no one took us seriously.

Women routinely lie about being raped for many reasons. Just this week, a woman who lied about being raped because the guy rejected her, got sent to 5 years. Obviously, that wasn't in the UK or Europe where they routinely ignore fake rape claimers (don't prosecute) so it doesn't "harm" real rape claimers.

There's nothing in the EU that causes a woman to have a 2nd thought about making a false rape claim.

I find it interesting that the women who accused Weinstein are telling the truth but the women who accused Trump were a bunch of liars. Funny how that works.

That's because Weinstein has decades of rumor about him and The Casting Couch is actually a thing enshrined in movies.

Trump said something secretly recorded, part joke, part male bravado, and people wanted to believe it's true. If Trump had actually been grabbing pussies that rumor would have preceded him long, long, long before he got into politics. Then there's that woman who said Trump reached over and grabbed her twat on an airplane. There's nothing credible to the story. We've been told to believe all rape victims and Never Trumpers have resorted to lies an violence to try to get their way.

That's why accusations against Trump didn't stick but those against Weinstein have gained traction.

He went on Stern and talked about walking in on underage girls as they were getting dressed and bragging that he was allowed to do it because he owned the pageant.

I saw a video the other day from about 10 years ago where he bragged about hiring a woman with no qualifications simply because she was beautiful. It wasn't just a throw away comment. It was quite a long story.

Then there is my personal favorite and the one I really felt should have made him lose the election where he sexxualizes his one year old daughter Tiffany.

He went on Stern and talked about walking in on underage girls as they were getting dressed and bragging that he was allowed to do it because he owned the pageant.

I saw a video the other day from about 10 years ago where he bragged about hiring a woman with no qualifications simply because she was beautiful. It wasn't just a throw away comment. It was quite a long story.

Then there is my personal favorite and the one I really felt should have made him lose the election where he sexxualizes his one year old daughter Tiffany.

This ties into that other comment I made elsewhere: The intent and culture way back in 1994 were different from today. You can't apply the social mores of today to judge a person for what they said almost 25 years ago.

He didn't sexualize his daughter. He was making a joke, a joke that was appropriate for his persona and reflected the time. You might not like it, especially today, but people pulled this out of the files to make a political point against Trump. That is unfair. Again, if you don't like a person anything they do will piss you off: "look at the bitch over there, eating crackers like he owns the place"; "look at that asshole over there, sexualizing women like he owns the pageant".

The other comments are similar, they are his brand.

Personally, I'd chose a beautiful man over a qualified woman if I had the choice in hiring. And I prefer doing school counselings with our handsome students more than the, um, average ones. It doesn't mean I'm unfair to other people. Most human beings enjoy attractive people. To deny that is to pushing an agenda.

Personally, I'd chose a beautiful man over a qualified woman if I had the choice in hiring. And I prefer doing school counselings with our handsome students more than the, um, average ones. It doesn't mean I'm unfair to other people.

Love ya, dude, but choosing to hire a handsome man over a (you're inferring, "more") qualified woman is a textbook example of unfairness to the latter.

Separately, I've seen a level of integrity in your collected posts to believe that while you may enjoy counseling better-looking students more, you also take care of those Plain Janes. You're one relentlessly candid SOB!

What's with everyone going to social media and crying "rape" rather than going to the police?!

The lead singer of some band went to social media to claim she was raped by Marilyn Manson's bass player.

If you were raped, then go to the fucking police. Stop trying to ruin someone's reputation by making bullshit claims on social media.

Why has this become a thing now?

I sometimes refer to a man who was framed for a murder (and falsely convicted). One time he was raped, but when he reported it, the police did not believe him and instead stuck him in a mental hospital. The doctors at the mental hospital realized he was completely sane and released him in just 2 days. Meanwhile, the police did absolutely nothing about the rape complaint. I guess only females can be raped.

Thanks to the feminist RAPE IS RAPE campaign, men can now be raped in the US. Sadly, males can only be raped by other males but females can be raped by either. They based their campaign on the UK sex crime law. Not surprisingly, feminists aren't concerned about gender equality for men.

The UK has a similar problem. Say for example a man and woman inserted a broom handle in a person's anus, against that person's will, there's only 1 rapist in the case. YEP, UK law requires a person to have a penis in order to commit rape, even if the penis isn't used in the act. 3 times since 2003 (as recently as March 2017), there has been an effort to equalize the sex crime laws, but feminists have always fought against it and won.

The only sex crime law that is worded to be gender neutral, despite it's extremely biased application, is the law against sex with any person under 16. The law says ANYONE who has sex with a person under the age of 16 is guilty of xxxxxxx (can't remember the exact name of the crime). However, (I believe it was Panaroma who did the show) that while nearly 1,000 boys under 16 had been prosecuted for having sex with their also under 16 girlfriend in the first decade of the law, no under 16 girl had been prosecuted for the same thing.

Personally, I'd chose a beautiful man over a qualified woman if I had the choice in hiring. And I prefer doing school counselings with our handsome students more than the, um, average ones. It doesn't mean I'm unfair to other people.

Love ya, dude, but choosing to hire a handsome man over a (you're inferring, "more") qualified woman is a textbook example of unfairness to the latter.

Separately, I've seen a level of integrity in your collected posts to believe that while you may enjoy counseling better-looking students more, you also take care of those Plain Janes. You're one relentlessly candid SOB!

"Candid SOB", I like it. I might have one of my kids make a mug with that on it for me.

Textbook case, is it? No. Everyone has attributes, skills, qualifications. While in my hypothetical company I might choose the better-looking employee (think Chris Hemsworth in Ghostbusters) if I didn't have staff on hand able to run my business and a good product, my decisions would lead me to fail. If so, that would be my punishment for my choices.

Let me say that a different way, Chris Hemsworth could add more value as an employee by nature of being extremely good looking and charismatic than a veteran manager. The choice is mine to make and the success or failure is mine to bear.

Your concept of fairness means my choices have to follow your principles. As an aesthete, I firmly hold to my own.

And yes, I love all my babies equally. Actually, my school is has a 75/25 female/male split. This year I was just a little disappointed that my homeroom was all girls.

We saw a similar thing with the 10 demands BLM has for "the white devils". GIVE ALL YOUR STUFF TO POCs, YOU EVIL FUCKING CUNTS WHO SHOULD DIE!!!!, CUZ RACIAL EQUALITY.

I remember back when I was active in the Gay Rights Movement (not the LGBT movement). Groups like ActUp went on Kiss Ins, going into churches and other public spaces and making out. The Gay Right's Movement was seen by most people as one and the same as Act Up. Today people who are in the LGBT movement and those that support the alphabet soup it's become are also seen as one and the same.

BLM is no different.

There are groups all over the planet who started their own chapters and what BLM means is different from group to group. (A few years ago a few students tried to start one at my school -- in Japan! -- but I calmly explained why that would be a bad idea and they let it go.) Like all things, the most extreme versions get put on the news.

To be clear, I think BLM started with good intentions (I'm not saying they were correct) but quickly turned into The Blob.

The FBI and Justice Depart stats prove it's nothing but shit, but like feminism, fuck the truth.

I didn't say they were true, I said they started with good intentions. I also said that the people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't all fall under the same umbrella even though they use the same name.

The FBI and Justice Depart stats prove it's nothing but shit, but like feminism, fuck the truth.

I didn't say they were true, I said they started with good intentions. I also said that the people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't all fall under the same umbrella even though they use the same name.

"...people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't fall under the same umbrella.." well how convenient for them! If they belong to BLM, then they are accountable what all BLM members do. Whenever some "white" group does something unacceptable, all members of that group are stigmatized. If there was a group WLM, it would instantly be labeled as being a white supremacist racist group.

The FBI and Justice Depart stats prove it's nothing but shit, but like feminism, fuck the truth.

I didn't say they were true, I said they started with good intentions. I also said that the people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't all fall under the same umbrella even though they use the same name.

"...people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't fall under the same umbrella.." well how convenient for them! If they belong to BLM, then they are accountable what all BLM members do. Whenever some "white" group does something unacceptable, all members of that group are stigmatized. If there was a group WLM, it would instantly be labeled as being a white supremacist racist group.

If they belong to BLM, then they are accountable for what all BLM members do. You do realize that's a way of thinking that leads to all Christians are X, all gays are Y, don't you?

To a point, I agree with you. I think these various groups should start new groups or a new group like All Lives Matter. In the meantime, it's best to keep an open mind and when someone says they support BLM ask what they mean. I'll guarantee most people don't understand the scope of what they're saying.

@ raphjd, if you argue with people in loud, shouting tones, then, yeah, people are going to say you're a racist, sexist, homophobe. If you're calm and collected you can avoid those traps.

I talk about these things all the time. If I don't know the person well, they walk on eggshells but when they realize I'm interested in conversation, they're almost always cool with it. Unexpectedly, it's always white men that have the hardest time with these conversations (with me). I think it's conditioning. I'm thinking about this white Canadian dude named John, gosh, he squirms when I bring these topics up but unless you're going to talk to me about TV shows and movies I care about, it's a hellofa lot better than idle chitchat.

The FBI and Justice Depart stats prove it's nothing but shit, but like feminism, fuck the truth.

I didn't say they were true, I said they started with good intentions. I also said that the people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't all fall under the same umbrella even though they use the same name.

"...people under BLM each have their own agendas, they don't fall under the same umbrella.." well how convenient for them! If they belong to BLM, then they are accountable what all BLM members do. Whenever some "white" group does something unacceptable, all members of that group are stigmatized. If there was a group WLM, it would instantly be labeled as being a white supremacist racist group.

If they belong to BLM, then they are accountable for what all BLM members do. You do realize that's a way of thinking that leads to all Christians are X, all gays are Y, don't you?

To a point, I agree with you. I think these various groups should start new groups or a new group like All Lives Matter. In the meantime, it's best to keep an open mind and when someone says they support BLM ask what they mean. I'll guarantee most people don't understand the scope of what they're saying.

@ raphjd, if you argue with people in loud, shouting tones, then, yeah, people are going to say you're a racist, sexist, homophobe. If you're calm and collected you can avoid those traps.

I talk about these things all the time. If I don't know the person well, they walk on eggshells but when they realize I'm interested in conversation, they're almost always cool with it. Unexpectedly, it's always white men that have the hardest time with these conversations (with me). I think it's conditioning. I'm thinking about this white Canadian dude named John, gosh, he squirms when I bring these topics up but unless you're going to talk to me about TV shows and movies I care about, it's a hellofa lot better than idle chitchat.

Being gay does not involve being a member of any group. If someone is going to join a group such as BLM, then they are accountable for whatever that group does.

We all know that ALL LIVES MATTER is deemed to be extremely racist by modern liberals. When modern liberals hear that, their brain tells them we said KILL ALL N*GGERS.

As already pointed out, WHITE LIVES MATTER despite being the most accurate when it comes to police shootings, when compared to crime figures, would be deemed extremely racist. Nothing can ever be "white".

You can't have Miss White America, but you can have Miss every other race America. I was told that the reason we can't have Miss White America is because we already have Miss America. When I explained that the same applies to other races, I was called a racist.

We all know that ALL LIVES MATTER is deemed to be extremely racist by modern liberals. When modern liberals hear that, their brain tells them we said KILL ALL N*GGERS.

As already pointed out, WHITE LIVES MATTER despite being the most accurate when it comes to police shootings, when compared to crime figures, would be deemed extremely racist. Nothing can ever be "white".

You can't have Miss White America, but you can have Miss every other race America. I was told that the reason we can't have Miss White America is because we already have Miss America. When I explained that the same applies to other races, I was called a racist.

A great deal of people who complain about racism and sexism, etc. have an inferiority complex. As a child, I used to get teased incessantly for having a large skull. I would sometimes respond that "I love it whenever you refer to my race and things like the size of my head. My head is large because it contains a large brain - unlike the tiny coconut sized head you have!"

I wouldn't call myself racist though.. because I don't like most people of my OWN race either. It's also not an issue of skin color. People from the West Indies tend to be very smart, hard working, pleasant, and have very dark skin.